• rotten@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 days ago

    Yea, but sex isn’t. And the way it’s done now is that gender is invoked as identical to sex when it’s beneficial and rebuked when it’s not.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      9 days ago

      We are talking about gender here. Gender is only identical with sex if the person so chooses to identify that way. If you think that’s “the way it’s done now,” you have been listening to too much conservative media.

      The fact that you don’t understand all of this does not speak well of you.

      • rotten@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        9 days ago

        We’re talking about both. Gender was traditionally identical to sex and this issue didn’t come up much till relatively recently. Outliers, like people born with both sets of organs, were just that. To be consistent with this philosophy, race must also now be done as “whoever identifies as such”. After all, it’s just as much of a societal construct.

          • Narauko@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            9 days ago

            Something from within the last few decades isn’t really archaic, that is generally reserved for (well?) over a hundred years old or older, and the vast majority of Lemmy users are either North American or European. Anglo/Eurocentric is going to be the relative norm on social media in general outside of specific apps, and those then trend East/South East Asiacentric due to their development origin. You should not be surprised to encounter this.

            Heteronormative will also currently still trend as a default since over 80% of the population identifies as such. Intersex is also somewhere around or under 1% of the population. While gender and sex can most certainly be different, at least currently the supermajority of people will have these aligned and will use them interchangeably. This shouldn’t invalidate or be used to discriminate against those that aren’t heteronormative by any means, but something that is true 80-90% of the time falls within the colloquial or layman’s qualifications for a broad assumption of “how the world works”.

            The fact that intersex people get to decide their primary sex (or more likely had a doctor decide for them at birth) on government forms is somewhat analogous to 3 wheeled motor vehicles that can be registered as either a car or a motorcycle depending on the State and/or county. This does not invalidate car or motorcycle as categories, nor does it invalidate andly other means of transport.

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 days ago

              Something from within the last few decades isn’t really archaic,

              I did not read past this. You clearly did not read my link. Come back when you read it since it talks about cultures going back thousands of years.

              • Narauko@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                8 days ago

                You can’t use archaic as a preparative against one thing and then come back and use it as a positive for its “opposite”. I read your link, it is a perfectly good link, so I guess your arguing that an archaic Indoasia-centric queernormative world view is “the way the world actually works” instead? If you think you can understand what someone is attempting to say/discuss by only half of an opening sentence, I understand why you seem to be arguing past multiple people in this thread.

                • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  8 days ago

                  No, I’m arguing that your rigid definition of gender (that no reputable biologist would agree with) is not the way the world works. Because gender and biological sex are different and have always been different and biological sex is far, far more complicated than XX and XY.

                  This was your claim:

                  Gender was traditionally identical to sex and this issue didn’t come up much till relatively recently.

                  Unless by “traditionally,” you are going by an entirely Anglo/Eurocentric view of the world (and only really applies to the Christian era), which is pretty damn bigoted, I showed you that you were wrong.

                  The proper thing to do would be to admit it.

                  I doubt you will. But it’s either you were wrong or all of those other cultures are not part of humanity. Which would be very bigoted.

                  • Narauko@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    8 days ago

                    I never said that gender is identical to sex, don’t go putting words in my mouth. I am not sure if you are just skimming things or intentionally reading negatively, because I did clearly say that the Global North is the target audience for most social media, including Lemmy, and thus yes, for a North American or European that does apply as “traditionally”.

                    I have said nothing contrary to that, nor said anything about it being either my world view, the only world view, a superior world view, or anything of the sort, and you are calling me a bigot for just pointing that fact out. I fully support the idea that sex and gender are not the same, can be different, and can be fluid, but also acknowledge that the majority of humans (I’ll even confidently say globally here) will have them relatively aligned and not even think about it. That is why there need to be protections for those that do, because they are a minority.

                    Way to go about pissing people off. Your purity test bullshit that anyone daring to discuss your individual world view is automatically a bigot must be a big hit at parties and brings people together around you. I’ll go out on a limb and say you are arguing that the non-Eurocentric queernormative world view is the superior world view, and that you do not believe that could be construed as a version of bigotry of any kind because you are “right”. Like the actual bigots on the other side don’t feel exactly the same.